What
kind of man would drop out of the medical profession and dedicate his
life to STOPPING advancement in the health sciences?

Opinion by Consumer
Advocate Tim Bolen

Location of Stephen
Barrett's "quackwatch.com" - the basement of his home at 2421 West
Greenleaf Street, Allentown, PA 18104

Stephen Barrett - Crackpot...

De-licensed MD Stephen Barrett, I believe, is one of
those people whose ambitions, and opinions of himself, far exceed his abilities.

Barrett
never achieved any success in his chosen medical profession. Because of that,
he has found frustration. He is rabidly jealous of those
that actually accomplish things. As an outlet for that frustration, he
hatefully attacks his betters.

And, there's always a market for hatred...

Bitterness against successful health professionals is
Barrett's hallmark. To him they're all
"quacks." In this, his essays are repetitive and
pedestrian. He says the same things, the same way, every time -
change the victim and the subject, and still you yawn your way through
his offerings. It's like he's filling out a form somebody gave
him...

It looks to me; that Quackbusting is the first successful thing
Barrett has ever been involved in. It is the only place he has
ever had, or could hope to have, recognition.. He is, and was, a failure
as an MD, and certainly as a Psychiatrist. He gave up his aspirations in the
medical profession, and retreated to his basement, years ago.

In Barrett's chosen profession
(Psychiatry), it is obvious that three things became evident to him (1) finishing even the minimum Board Certification
requirements was intellectually beyond him. (2) he would never
achieve eminence, (3) consequently, the
Psychiatric industry quickly relegated Barrett to his appropriate level
(the bottom)..

A look at Barrett's CV bears out my assertions.
Not only could he not hold a Psychiatric position for any length of time, but the
positions he held were dubious, to say the least.

I also suspect that, during his so-called
"medical career," Barrett was having serious trouble even
maintaining minimum MD requirements. MDs are required to keep up CMEs (continuing medical education units) - and Barrett's writings show,
to me, that he wasn't (and isn't) keeping up with new health
trends. Licensing Boards monitor licensed MDs and force compliance
with the rules.

It looks to me that, in 1993 Barrett simply gave
up his medical aspirations, turned in his MD license, and went
into a business where he could get the attention he seems to crave.

Take an overactive self importance, couple it with
glaring failure and rejection in his chosen profession, add a cup of
molten hatred for those that do succeed, pop
it in the oven - and out comes Stephen Barrett - self-styled "expert in
everything."

In California, he's been
FORMALLY discredited in Superior Court, and in a
PUBLISHED Appeals Court decision, where he was described, by the three Judge
panel, as "biased, and unworthy of credibility."

Barrett, we also know, was
forced to give up his medical license in Pennsylvania in 1993 when his part-time
employment at the State Mental Hospital was terminated, and he had so few (nine)
private patients during his last five years of practice, that he couldn't afford
the Malpractice Insurance premiums Pennsylvania requires.

In a job market in the United
States, where there is a "doctor shortage," Stephen Barrett, after his
termination by the State mental Hospital, couldn't find employment. He was
in his mid-50s at the time. He should have been at the top of his craft -
yet, apparently, he couldn't find work.

In a California Court case,
former Barrett peer, and fellow Board Member of the National Council Against
Health Fraud (NCAHF), William Jarvis PhD, testified, under oath, that Barrett
and Robert Baratz conspired to use the NCAHF, without Board permission, as a
Plaintiff in over 40 cases in California, where Barrett and Baratz were to
testify as "expert witnesses," and get expert witness fees. The
NCAHF Board was never consulted.

One of
those cases caused the NCAHF to be saddled with over $100,000 in legal fees
awarded their victim - and the NCAHF doesn't have the money to pay that debt.
In fact, the NCAHF is SO DESPERATE for funds it is being run out of a cardboard
box in the back room of Baratz's Braintree, Massachusetts hair removal and ear
piercing salon.

Those type of cases Barrett involved
the NCAHF in were considered so heinous that the people of California just
passed an initiative (Proposition #64) banning this kind of lawsuit for all
time.

Barrett, in the
Canadian case, has formally admitted, according to Canadian law, to a number
of situations put to him by the Plaintiff, including:

"The sole purpose of the activities of Barrett & Baratz are to
discredit and cause damage and harm to health care practitioners, businesses
that make alternative health therapies or products available, and advocates
of non-allopathic therapies and health freedom."

"Barrett has interfered with the civil rights of numerous Americans,
in his efforts to have his critics silenced."

"Barrett has strategically orchestrated the filing of legal actions in
improper jurisdictions for the purpose of frustrating the victims of such
lawsuits and increasing his victims costs."

"Barrett failed the exams he was required to pass to become a Board
Certified Medical Doctor."

What's humorous (dark
humor) about Stephen Barrett's attack on leading-edge
health professionals, is Barrett's crude, uneducated, attempts to explain what he
thinks is wrong with his victim's theories.

Barrett's lack of education, and understanding of his victims' basic concepts and theories is awesome to
regard.

For instance, one of the biggest complaints that the quackbuster
dolts make about scientist, author, and health humanitarian Hulda
Regehr Clark PhD, is that "there
is no evidence of the validity of her work in the peer reviewed
journals."

Huh???? What a quintessentially STUPID statement.

The quackbuster minions are so ignorant that they really do not
understand that that IS THE NATURE of new research - new findings are not in the
literature - they're NEW. Like, was Thomas Edison NOT supposed to
come out with the light bulb because no one else had already invented
it, or written about it?

What Barrett, and his idiot henchmen, are trying to say is that "If Clark were right,
somebody else would have already invented it... so therefore she can't
be right"

Duh...

Organized Stupidity is the Hallmark of the
Quackbuster Conspiracy...

Barrett, and his vacuous
minions, like to spout off other stupid "rules"
that they think should apply. The application of which, has to
make the scientific community shudder.

One of the other totally BRAINLESS statements Barrett's parrotts like to to
screech out is "It hasn't been double-blind studied!!"

The
"double-blind study"
is one of about 45 different kinds of scientific studies used, and
approved for use, within the scientific community. It was designed
for, and is usually restricted to, testing new dangerous drugs for
the claims drug companies wish to make about their new laboratory
produced products. Generally, in this type of study, you give half
of the group the new pill, and the other half gets a sugar pill that
looks just like the original. This type of study simply does not apply
to new research. Never has, never will.

There's a lot more...

Barrett's Funding - TOP SECRET...

Barrett was cornered in a
Federal case in the State of Oregon not long ago, and asked about his
income. He testified that over the past two years he made a TOTAL
of $54,000.

How then does he afford to
carry on fourteen (14) separate legal actions at one time?

If each legal action cost
him $100,000, that would come to 1.4 million dollars ($1,400,000).